ASHDOWN FOREST VISITOR SURVEY ASHDOWN FOREST VISITOR SURVEY Footprint Contract Reference: 335 Date: 5th December 2016 Version: Final Recommended Citation: Liley, D., Panter, C. & Blake, D. (2016). Ashdown Forest Visitor Survey 2016. Unpublished report. ASHDOWN FOREST VISITOR SURVEY Summary This report has been commissioned jointly by six local authorities (Wealden, Mid Sussex, Lewes, Tunbridge Wells, Tandridge and Sevenoaks) and presents an analysis of the results of visitor survey work at Ashdown Forest conducted in late spring/early summer 2016, providing up-to-date data on recreation use of the Ashdown Forest. The survey work included counts of visitors and interviews with a random sample of interviewees at twenty access points, selected to represent a range of access points in terms of parking capacity and geographical spread across the Forest. In addition, automated counters were used at a small number of additional locations to count visitors and fifteen driving transects – counting all parked cars across all car-parks – were undertaken. Key findings from the visitor survey work included: 452 interviews were completed. Many (50% interviewees) were visiting on their own (i.e. no other people with them) and the majority of interviewees (71%) were accompanied by one or more dogs. Some parties had particularly large numbers of dogs (two groups had more than ten dogs with them). Gills Lap, King’s Standing and Crowborough were the busiest survey points; together these locations accounted for nearly a third (32%) of all interviews. The majority of interviewees were on a short trip and visiting directly from home (98% interviewees). Holiday-makers accounted for a small proportion of interviews (1% of interviewees) and were excluded from the analyses in the report, ensuring that the results directly link to local residents. The majority of interviewees (69%) gave dog walking as their main activity. Walking was the next most common activity (18% interviewees). Dog walking was the most common activity at all survey points apart from Reserve (here dog walkers accounted for 19% of the interviews). Other notable differences between survey points were the relatively high number of interviewees who were on a family outing/picnic at Lintons and the Forest Centre. Around half (48% interviewees) stated they had been visiting Ashdown Forest for more than 10 years. By contrast, just 5% of interviewees were on their first visit. Visits were typically short, with over half (59% interviewees) visiting for less than an hour. Most interviewees were regular visitors to the location where interviewed, with 285 interviewees (63%) visiting at least weekly. The most regular visitors appear to be dog walkers and joggers (note that only three joggers were interviewed), with both groups having a relatively high proportion of interviewees that were daily visitors. Nearly a third of interviewees (29% interviewees) did not tend to visit at a particular time of day. For those that did tend to visit at a particular time of day, the mornings appeared to be the preferred time. There was little evidence that the interviewed visitors tended to visit more at particular times of year and most (81% interviewees) tended to visit equally all year round for their chosen activity. Most interviewees (81%) had arrived at the survey point by car. Nearly a fifth had arrived on foot (18%). Scenery/variety of views was the most common response (48% interviewees) as to why the interviewee chose to visit Ashdown Forest that day, rather than another location. Other common reasons were close to home (46%), and good for the dog/dog enjoys it (28%). 1 ASHDOWN FOREST VISITOR SURVEY 53% of interviewees indicated that they would not have gone to an alternative site, or were unsure which alternative site they would have visited could they not have gone to Ashdown Forest. Of named alternative sites given by interviewees, the South Downs (named by 8% interviewees) was by far the most commonly named location. Rotherfield, Sheffield Park and Seven Sisters/Cuckmere Haven were the next most commonly named sites. Taking into account the frequency with which interviewees stated they visited the named alternative site, Rotherfield was the most commonly visited single alternative site, with South Downs ranked second. Routes were plotted for 446 interviewees visiting from home or staying with friends and family. Route lengths ranged from 31m to 7,361m, with a typical route length (from all routes) being 2,616m (the median). There were significant differences between survey locations, with interviewees typically walking further at King’s Standing, Long and Box and undertaking shorter routes at Crowborough, Nutley, Forest Row and Poundgate. Most dog walkers (87% of dog walking interviewees) and a relatively high proportion of other visitors were aware of guidance relating to dog walking at Ashdown Forest. Of those dog walkers that were aware of guidance, 39% were able to specifically mention the dog walking code of conduct (‘4Cs’) currently promoted. The majority (88% interviewees) were aware that there was a visitor centre at Wych Cross. Home locations (primarily postcode data) were collected for 98% of interviewees and enabled visitor origins to be mapped. The maps showed a wide scatter of visitors across Sussex and largely ranged from London to the south coast. The average straight-line distance between the home location and the survey point was 8,402m (median 4,870m). A quarter (25%) of interviewees lived within 1,459m of the survey point and three quarters (75%) lived within 9,643m. 72% of all those on a short visit from home and whose postcodes were mapped were from Wealden District, with a further 12% from Mid Sussex and 5% from Tunbridge Wells. There was a clear pattern whereby those who visited Ashdown Forest more regularly tended to live closer to the SPA. Key findings from the visitor count data included: In total, 2,794 people (adults and minors) were counted by surveyors during 320 hours of survey at the 20 access points (i.e. while interviews were conducted). Considering only those observed entering the site, this amounted to 1,506, an average of 4.7 people per hour. A typical visiting group would consist of two adults and one dog, and half of all groups included a minor. There were highly significant differences between visitor numbers at different locations. The four busiest locations observed from the tally data were King’s Standing, Long, Forest Centre and Gills Lap. In addition the composition of groups differed greatly between locations, particularly in the number of adults and minors at different locations. Driving transects (which covered all parking locations) recorded an average of 159 vehicles per transect. Vehicle counts showed typically more vehicles at weekends than weekdays and a peak at midday, followed closely by morning, however these differences were not statistically significant. From the survey findings we estimate around 4,541 visits per day to Ashdown Forest. The average number at an individual access point was 32.7, and the maximum was 340.2 (Kings Standing). A model showing the spatial distribution of visitors across the site is generated which shows how access is spread across the site. The model shows access as particularly concentrated around the 2 ASHDOWN FOREST VISITOR SURVEY eastern side of the site (e.g. King’s Standing) and also to the north (Wych Cross Forest Centre, Lintons etc.) and the south/central part (around Box). 3 ASHDOWN FOREST VISITOR SURVEY Contents 1. Introduction ......................................................................................... 7 Overview ................................................................................................................ 7 Ashdown Forest ...................................................................................................... 7 Legislative context .................................................................................................. 7 Impacts and importance of access .......................................................................... 8 Previous visitor survey work ................................................................................... 9 The need for this work ............................................................................................ 9 2. Methods ............................................................................................ 12 Initial GIS Data Collation ....................................................................................... 12 Visitor Survey Fieldwork ....................................................................................... 13 Selection of Survey Locations ......................................................................................... 13 Survey Effort and Timing of Surveys ............................................................................... 16 Interviews ..................................................................................................................... 16 Counts of visitors (‘tallies’) ............................................................................................. 16 Car-park counts (“Driving Transects”) ............................................................................. 17 Automated Counters ...................................................................................................... 17 Analysis and spatial model of visitor numbers .....................................................